The University of Oregon will now issue random drug testing for its student athletes. The new policy, which will be reviewed by the university next month following a public hearing, might just catch some unsuspecting marijuana user and re-direct his life through confidential drug-education program. Or it might be a colossal waste of time.But let's call this policy what it is: The Cliff Harris Rule.

Oregon was embarrassed by Harris' refusal to get control of his life. His well-publicized 118-mph traffic stop, the whole "We smoked it all," exchange with a state trooper and his subsequent burn out in Eugene was a public-relations disaster. It spurred deeper examination by national media, who talked with fellow students, and discovered - gasp - that college athletes might be playing video games and smoking marijuana.

Something dramatic and showy needed to be done. Not to stop people from smoking weed, necessarily. Rather, to make the public understand the UO takes drugs seriously. And so now UO -- and Oregon State, too -- has a policy that feels destined for a date with the Supreme Court on whether or not its even constitutional.

Let's be straight: Drugs are bad. College athletes shouldn't be using them. Coaches and universities should do everything in their power to educate players, and deter drug use, and to make sure safety and good health are a foundation of what's being taught and represented. Something needed to be done in the wake of Harris, but random testing with a flimsy penalty phase behind it isn't going to get it done.

The current drug-testing policy allows coaches to test athletes based upon reasonable suspicion. It fits with the Fourth Amendment, which allows for action from the university when there's suspicion that someone is involved in wrongdoing. I have to believe that Harris was being randomly tested after his traffic stop, and I have to believe that the other student-athletes who have had public run-ins with law enforcement (See: Masoli, Jeremiah) might have also been candidates for testing, but I'm convinced that drawing random numbers on, say, a Thursday and testing, say, a women's volleyball player isn't going to solve a thing.

I don't know if UO really believes it has a marijuana epidemic. But I'll bet they agree they have a perception issue. The press surrounding Harris and Masoli, who was dismissed himself after a traffic stop in which he was in possession of marijuana, was loud and ugly. And this whole random-testing charade feels rooted in perception instead of prevention.

Oregon should instead invest the time, energy and dollars they're putting into random testing into a larger, cutting-edge program on drug education and prevention. The Ducks already have the best uniforms, the coolest facilities, and a Top-5 football program. So why not try to lead the country with fresh thinking on drugs instead of falling in line with old-world philosophies?

Opponents of drug testing heard that the Ducks would test players randomly and asked, "Are they testing coaches? Administrators? Is this even legal?"

Wrong questions.

Instead, ask: Does Oregon want to lead or follow? Why don't the innovative and forward-thinking Ducks build the nation's top university drug-education center next to the renovated football complex? Why are they so worried about making people believe they're doing something big of simply doing what might actually work?

Better training for coaches in identifying possible users. More effective education for athletes. More awareness in general about the negative effects of drug use, complete with powerful seminars led by athletes who have burned out.

Invite Harris to speak someday.

That will work.

I suppose some athlete at Oregon will test positive this month under the random testing. As a result, the athlete will receive drug education. A second positive test would result in the player signing a behavior modification contract. A third positive test would result in a suspension for 50-percent of the team's games. A fourth positive test would result in a loss of scholarship and dismissal.

Thing is, this is the same punishment that existed before random testing was introduced.

So until this whole thing is challenged in court let's call anyone who tests positive under the random drug-testing policy what they are.